Friend of the Orthosphere Svein Sellanraa/rkirk has some nice articles on the new Hungarian constitution, which, from our reactionary perspective, is like a dream come true.  See here and here and here.  Here’s a summary from an article he links:

The first issue that has provoked dismay among critics is that Hungary is no longer a republic. The words “Republic of” have been excised from the nation’s official title. According to left-wing commentators, this suggests democracy is in danger. Considering that Hungary was declared a republic on 1 February, 1946, by a Communist-controlled government that had gained power with 17 per cent of the vote, the term hardly seems redolent of civic liberties. By its immemorial constitutional tradition, Hungary is ruled by the Holy Crown of St Stephen, the ultimate symbol of authority. The royal seal of Hungarian kings did not bear the monarch’s name but the inscription: “The seal of the Holy Crown of Hungary.”

The removal of republican nomenclature was the culmination of a process begun under a new law, the Lex Millenaris, when the royal regalia were carried in procession to the Hungarian parliament on January 1, 2000, as the symbols of authority. Although the monarchy has not been restored in the person of an individual, if a Habsburg restoration were eventually thought politic the Archduke Georg, the Magyarised son of the late Crown Prince Otto, already resides in Budapest. Hungary’s post-Habsburg history has been tragic. At the Treaty of Trianon in 1920, Woodrow Wilson robbed Hungary of 71 per cent of its territory, 66 per cent of its population and its only seaport. That was a preliminary taste of American foreign policy initiatives.

The new constitution makes the classic statement of Burkean philosophy: “Our Basic Law is the foundation of our legal system; it is a contract between Hungarians past, present and future.” That recognition of the seamless continuum of history and the transience of generations stands head and shoulders above the trashy verbiage of EU treaties. Not only does it “recognise the role of Christianity in preserving nationhood”, it “professes that the family and the nation constitute the principal framework of our coexistence”. No wonder it is anathema to the Frankfurt Marxists of the EU.

It protects human life from the moment of conception and defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. It lists the crimes of Communism and lifts the statute of limitations that protected the criminals of the Soviet era who despatched 600,000 Hungarians to concentration camps.

11 Responses

  1. which, from our reactionary perspective, is like a dream come true.

    It certainly is, and it’s hard to believe it’s happening, or being “allowed”. As a matter of fact, I thought I had heard that there was some pushback from the EU.

    I think we need to remember that “God opposes the proud”, and that “for everything there is a season”. It may be that God is preparing to renew Eastern Europe just as he gets ready to judge the West.

    Have you ever been to Hungary? I didn’t know anything about it until I backpacked through it. It has some stunning history and architecture:'s%20square&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=168l3448l0l3592l14l9l0l0l0l0l205l1160l1.5.2l8l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1440&bih=837&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=4socT9ilDobi0QHqiPTHCg

  2. The first crack in the liberal dam? Or a minor spark of apostasy soon to be crushed?

  3. This is wonderful.

  4. These days, it seems like you can’t get anywhere without a billionaire on your side:

    The organizers of the rally, billionaire Gabor Szeles, news magazine editor Andras Bencsik and others said the rally was to show Hungary would not bow to the West.

    “We won’t be a dominion, we don’t want to be a colony,” Bencsik told the crowd. “This is our message to those abroad. “The other is we fully support Viktor Orban, and we are proud of what we achieved at the 2010 elections.”

    Political analyst Zoltan Kiszelly said the size of the crowd was a clear message that Fidesz was by far the strongest political force in the country.

    “They have shown the political left that the street does not belong to them,” Kiszelly told Reuters. “And they have sent a message to the government’s partners abroad to stop trying to tell us what to do, the government is doing fine.”

    “The way the Italian or the Greek governments were removed will not work in Hungary, and early elections are out of the question with this kind of public support.”

    Judit Marcsok, a 43-year-old homemaker from Mogyorod, said she was appalled at the tone EU politicians used in their critique of Hungary.

    “I was completely enraged when socialist and liberal MEP’s screamed this week in Strasbourg, with veins on their necks bulging, at the Hungarian prime minister,” she said. “This is no way to negotiate, this is no attitude to any country.”

  5. It’s only fair — after all, they have George Soros, so why shouldn’t we have Gabor Szeles?

  6. But all the politically active billionaires in the US-at least since Ross Perot disappeared- fit into one or more of the following categories: globalist, Zionist, left-wing Democrat. Hence the salient elements in US politics are
    globalism, Zionism and left-wing liberalism/social democracy/”cultural marxism.”

  7. The NYT has been raging pretty hard. Good times.

    Countdown until the EU rolls out the tanks?

  8. As a Pole I rush with expression of my highest admiration for Hungarian courage that should and I hope it will awaken Poland to stand right by our Hungarian brothers.What marvelous changes,what perfect reclaiming of their national destiny.
    Soros,Goldman and Sachs are not your patron saints- Saint Steven is!!!!!

  9. I’m a surprised and pleased supporter of the new Hungarian constitution, but it’s a little simplistic to say that Hungary was “robbed of its territory at Trianon.” Most of the land that Hungary lost was populated by non-Hungarians, and Hungary simply didn’t have the power or the mandate to retain it.

    For example, anti-Trianonists often complain about the loss of Transylvania to Romania. This show great chutzpah and narcissism because the pre-Trianon governance of Transylvania was spectacularly bigoted. Under Hungarian rule, the Romanian majority had no basic civil rights; for instance, evidence could not be given in court in Romanian under the Unio Trium Nationum, so peasants were effectively barred from using the legal system; likewise, publication and education in Romanian were illegal. If the Hungarians had governed their empire differently, its demise might have been worth mourning.

  10. Some remarks (I am actually Hungarian, speak the language):

    “the Archduke Georg, the Magyarised son of the late Crown Prince Otto, already resides in Budapest”

    And he is a big liberal, he is not of much use to conservatives at all, to say the least.

    BTW the weird thing is the following. This is in many ways a very “liberal”, “progressive” and “EU-friendly” Constitution: it is the first European Constitution to be built explicitly of the values of the Treaty of Lisbon i.e. “EU Constitution”, it recognizes much more than the previous one “progressive” values like environmentalism, in fact a reasonable “progressive” should see it as a step forward. What happened here is that usual “progressive” intolernace that they cannot suffer someone or something who is “progressive” too but a bit different way or more consistently.

    It is the same kind of witch-hunt than against Pim Fortuyn who was simply a more consistent “progressive” than those who damned him: he simply thought a brown skin is not a good excuse to violate the liberal rules of Dutch society and be “homophobic” or “misogynic”. That in the eyes of “progressives” made him a “Fascist”. The average “progressive” does not actually care one bit about gays or women, he cares about the power of his group against his constructed enemies (rich white men), and does not tolerate anyone who would apply the same ideas to another group which is not their targeted, rival enemy group.

    The Hungarian Constitution is simply a slightly different and in many ways more consistent kind of “progressive” work. This is why they hate it. Not because it is really conservative – it isn’t.

  11. Hello Shenpen,

    Thank you for providing a native’s view of this. Could you tell me what specifically in the Hungarian constitution is objectionable from a conservative point of view?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: